|Snapshot of the Videogame (It does seem very violent, not my taste, |
but this type of violent videogaming rhetoric exists on both sides.)
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
The death of fiction I feel is a bit of a stretch for this article. It may be the death of a literary magazine; at least a printed one. But fiction will live on. It will evolve, just like it always has. We may consume it differently, but it will always be there along with those who appreciate it.
The Death of (Short) Fiction (Published in Establishment-Supported Literary Journals Run by CW Faculty)?
Intuitively, as an artist whose chosen form is the short story, the idea of fewer outlets existing that may be interested in publishing my work is a bit harrowing. But then I thought about it for a minute and I just don't see this as a big deal.
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Does a recording of a story, told live, not from a pre-written text, said exactly as if they were saying it to you in person over a beer, count as art/literature?
It's a very immediate sort of nonfiction, but I think if done right it can be considered to be art. Naturally, we all know people who are lousy at telling stories—they get sidetracked, spend time on boring or irrelevant details, repeat themselves, etc. and that's not the kind of "personal storytelling" I'm talking about.
Though you get into hairy territory if you declare that something isn't art just because it isn't GOOD art (thinking of the Twilight conversation from in class).
Saturday, February 18, 2012
Well, this was a pretty discouraging read, wasn't it?
But I did take comfort in the fact that this article was dated 2 years ago, when pretty much every industry, including printed media, was treading through some serious pessimism.
And yeah, printed media is kind of screwed and will soon be pushed into niche markets. But fiction, particularly short fiction, falling out of vogue? Maybe then it seemed like it would, but with the exploding success of e-readers and emergence of people like Amanda Hocking (who I haven't read and can't judge the quality of, but whose success provides a model despite whatever the integrity of her work may be), it seems to me like it's easier than ever for fiction writers to make money by self-publishing (a term that will soon lose its negative stigma-indeed, with the help of the Internet, maybe someday all publishing will be self-publishing).
Although I am one of those silly luddite purists who likes the heft, texture, and even smell of an actual book (not to mention it never runs out of batteries), the removal of paper from literature does little to change the soul of the thing; it's still about words, words are the key. Change the type of paper, the font, the binding, and it will be the same book, the same story, the same spirit. This principle applies further to the e-book. The only real difference is convenience.
And I'd like to object to the disdainful tone with which Genoways referred to the blogosphere. I realize that the emergence of blogs poses a very legitimate problem to journalistic integrity and whatnot, but there are examples of blogs that do what newspapers and magazines have done but do it streamlined, more efficiently, and more regularly. These blogs tend to be highly specialized, with a very narrow focus, so for every niche interest there is probably a blog that keeps up to date on the worldwide news regarding that interest. For example, compare the hip-hop magazine XXL to the hip-hop blog 2dopeboyz. XXL is sleeker and has clearly spent more money on web design, which makes sense because they were making money first and for longer than 2dopeboyz. But the 2dopeboyz model is simple, it loads on your computer fast, and its up-to the minute blurbs and updates, not to mention providence of downloads for singles before they even become available on iTunes, allows then to be a lot more efficient. Take any one story from XXL's main page and search for it on 2dopeboyz, and you'll find they covered it a long time ago and have had a hundred new things to tell their readers about since. And the blogosphere has been better for new and emerging artists in hip-hop as well, its free and informationally democratic hype-machine rapidly replacing the record company-to-radio model.
Sorry for that semi-off-topic rant, but this is an exciting time in history and these new models of distribution that are developing may come to shape how business is done in the coming Information Age. Yeah, it's a bummer that all these wonderful old publications that have been so good to so many people for so long are now going under, but some new model is going come up to replace them, something similar to the online magazine we are creating, perhaps. It's just exciting to think about, is all.
Nobody seems to have noticed this yet. It wouldn't let me make a comment to the wiki page, so I made a comment here.
Distortion of perception is aural, visual, and sensual. It is fun house mirrors and rumor mills. It is a manipulation of noise. It is a mash-up of surrealism, dreams, truth, and memories. Distortion is in an altered and altering. Language, stereotypes, body image, and social boundaries are distorted: airbrushed fantasies on magazine covers, virtual identities and avatars, political misrepresentations, and partial truths in the media. Distortion is artificial and organic. It is a cloned image that contorts reality.
There's either a word missing or there are some extra words in that sentence. It looks like this typo made its way onto the flyer as well.
Is there a way to allow comments on wiki pages from people who aren't on that particular team, without letting them revise the page directly? I think for catching errors like this it'd be useful, plus I think those of us in the criticism team in particular would like some input from everyone else on what direction we should go in, since criticism is a completely new section.
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Monday, February 13, 2012
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
Sunday, February 5, 2012
Kairos further has a three-tiered review process, not a two-tiered review process as this article suggests. Kairos is a refereed online open-access journal that publishes webtexts in the field of rhetoric, technology, and pedagogy. As an open-access journal Kairos is free to all users. Each submission to Kairos undergoes a unique and highly collaborative three tiered editorial review process. At the first tier submissions are evaluated for their quality and scholarly credibility. The second tier consists of a two-to-three week review by the entire editorial board in which an assessment is completed to decide whether a submission is a potential candidate to be published in Kairos. If a submission makes it to the third tier, the editors assign a staff member to work with the author to facilitate revisions as needed. After completion of the third tier the author is asked to resubmit their edited submission for a tier one review where the process begins again before a submission is accepted for publication.
Kairos contributors are also asked to employ a variety of creative and hybrid research methods which may include: theoretical, pedagogical, empirical, and historical research. Kairos contributors are provided the opportunity to publish in six different sections [Topoi, Praxis (including: Praxis Wiki’s), Inventio, Interviews, Reviews, and Disputatio] with six different focuses. This design challenges contributors to think outside-the-box and use innovative mediums and methods to propel reader reflection and enhance opportunities for online learning in the field. The very nature of this Journal makes it an incredibly dynamic pedagogical tool for research in the field of rhetoric, technology, and pedagogy. For example, Jennifer Bowie’s webtexts concerning podcasting in computers and writing classrooms (Link) shows the heterogeneity of research methods employed in Kairos webtexts. Bowie’s treatment and goals for this research are clearly pedagogical in that she is explores the practice and implementation of podcast assignments in writing classrooms. Her research is also highly theoretical in that she inspects the controversy surrounding the term “podcasting,” its shared elements with other genres of media, its “rhetorical roots of spoken argument and texts,” and typologies for writing classrooms, including teacher-produced, student-produced, and externally-produced podcasts. We see there is also an empirical component to her research where she provides a review of limited empirical research on podcasting. Finally, we can also understand her research to be historical through the integration of the five cannons as an example for “how podcasting may be used in classrooms to help students rethink ‘old’ writing concepts” that would help bringing old concepts like the five cannons back into students print writing in new ways.
Finally, Kairos calls for very creative and collaborative digital authorship. Justin Hodson, Scott Nelson, Andrew Rechnitz and Cleve Wiese have produced a very compelling and interactive scholastic webtext about the importance of undergraduate multimedia (Link). Additional contributors that collaborated on this project include: Amanda Booher, Cate Blouke, Will Burdette, Anthony Collamati, D. Diane Davis, Marjorie Foley, Sean McCarthy, Lauren Nahas, Justin Tremel, Tekla Schell, & Victor J. Vitanza.
I agree with Blair and Cadle about the importance of implementing more collaborative, coequal, feminist peer-review processes in publishing. Journals like Kairos provide a model for how this can be done and help us to visibly appreciate the benefits of such collaborative, heterogeneous, and multimodal editorial processes.
Saturday, February 4, 2012
Friday, February 3, 2012
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
So I had a thought this morning about something we may want to clarify about submissions. I'm not sure if the blog is the best place to post this, maybe the wiki would be better because it's less public. However, I can't post to the wiki as I'm unsure how to join it. I've made an account, messed around with it a little, but beyond that I'm lost. Any help would be appreciated.
Anyway, I was talking to a photojournalist friend of mine, and I thought of this situation:
Say someone submits a work with photos in it. I don't mean something like a youtube video, not really multimedia. Just some sort of prose, whether it's fiction, non-fiction, criticism, whatever. The photos are a significant portion of the work; without it, the work wouldn't be the same. The prose is by one person and the photos are by someone else, who also wants to submit photos under their own name (but not the same photos used in the prose piece) separately. Is this allowed or is it considered "cheating" (for lack of a better word)?
Personally, I'll make a pitch for allowing it. It seems fair to me because the work is considered two separate genres, even though one contains the other, and also because the work would be under someone else's name. Even if it were the same person submitting both, since they're still two separate genres, I think it would be fair enough. I can see where some people might disagree, though, so I thought maybe it's best to discuss it and try to clarify where we stand on it before the issue comes up.
What do you all think?